*It must meet your standard though. He cannot use euphemisms and must say boldly fleshly intercourse like physical copulation or sex. I will also accept something along the lines that God does not have semen as that would make the sex point moot.

You accuse Joshua of “splitting hairs” yet LDS critics often do the same thing. They push LDS Church members into a corner by taking a half a quote here and a half a quote there without looking at the whole thing.

For example, many LDS Church critics use the following quote from Bruce R. McConkie to say that YES, the LDS Church does believe God had sex with Mary in order to have Jesus Christ.

“And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events.”

But then, later in the same quote, McConkie says, “Our Lord is the only mortal person ever born to a virgin, because he is the only person who ever had an immortal Father. Mary, his mother, “was carried away in the Spirit.”

If you read half of a quote, you only get half of the information. If you read the whole quote, you might learn a little more.

You first said, “I have talked to several Mormons who believe that Mary was married to the LDS Heavenly Father and that he had sexual relations with the Virgin Mary, (at the time).”

I also know Mormons who vote Republican and some who vote Democrat. I know some Mormons who drink Coca-Cola and other who refuse to. The old “I know a Mormon who believes that…” argument is at best very weak, since every person has their own individual thoughts and ideas about everything.

You next said, “Harold B. Lee was asked about the Immaculate Conception and he said, “Never have I talked about ‘sexual intercourse’ between Deity and the mother of the Savior.”

Notice he did not say, “That’s obsurd. Mormons do not ever teach this!”

So in other words, because President Lee did not denounce the doctrine in the exact wording you wish, it therefore makes it true? That’s stretching things quite a bit, wouldn’t you say?

In reference to the scripture quoted by Harold B. Lee, you next said, “Do you see the problem? The “little” said is about a “divine personage” who came from heaven and did something to impregnate the Virgin Mary. What did the Heavenly Father do??? Mormons can only speculate that there was a mysterious insemination. That sexual transmission of semen is Mormonism.”

With all due respect, are you aware of your complete and total contradiction with this statement? If “Mormons can only speculate” how Jesus Christ was conceived, than your follow up statement, “That sexual transmission of semen is Mormonism,” is totally and completely without merit. Either Mormons are speculating or they are not.

You next said, “Mormons cannot say that the male DNA or chromosomes came from nothing.”

Who said it did, and what does that have to do with sexual tramsmission? You’re under the obvious assumption that the only way God could have transmitted a male chromosome into Mary is by having sex with her. Can I assume then you think God is limited in his ability and that he can only do certain things the way man does them?

Finally you said, “Come to the real Jesus of the Bible. The real Jesus was conceived in a miracle by ex-nihilo through the Holy Spirit.”

Does the “real” Jesus believe in stating church doctrine based upon hearsay, assumption and twisting of people’s words?

I think you miss the point. We believe Jesus was part man (“son of man”) and part god (“son of god”) both referenced in the NT. The key aspect of our faith is that this genetic makeup is literal. However this does not mean that here was copulation. With artificial insemination, test-tube babies and cloning just being discovered by man, you would think Heavenly Father would have a way.

Excellent link to see how this is viewed by those of the faith.
http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Brochures/Did_God_have_Sex_with_Mary.pdf

Joshua, seems to fit in fine with such dishonest practices. He may be able to say the current church does not teach that God had sex with Mary, but he cannot make the claim that it is a myth and that it was never taught nor that all mormons do not believe it. He can try to split hairs by saying some leaders were just speaking as men but did not really know. And that since it was never officially canonized by whatever standard chosen*, it was never offical teachings. But again, there are no offical canonized versions for most of uniquely Mormon practices(ie temple ceremonies, tithing, application of the word of wisdom, priesthood ban, polygamy, number of children, swearing, appropriate dress, nature of Native Americans, masturbation, roles of women, and so on). But as this explaination stirs up confusion and more questions, it is easier to just falsely deride it as a myth and move on.

*There is no official standard for determining what is doctrine and what is speculation, as the official standard does not meet the official standard. Nor do most of the core established doctrines. As far as I have researched.

CORRECTION: Actually, I have talke to several Mormons who believe that Mary was married to the LDS Heavenly Father and that he had sexual relations with the Virgin Mary, (at the time). There is an LDS doctrine taught by Joseph Smith that mater cannot be created from nothing. If the Virgin Mary gave her unfertilzed egg to make the body of Jesus, what did the Heavenly Father provide and how did it happen? LDS Leaders do not discuss it. Harold B. Lee was asked about the Immaculate Conception and he said, “Never have I talked about ‘sexual intercourse’ between Deity and the mother of the Savior.”

Notice he did not say, “That’s obsurd. Mormons do not ever teach this!”

The LDS Apostle Lee said, “If teachers were wise in speaking of this matter about which the Lord has said but very little, they would rest their discussion on this subject with merely the words which are recorded on this subject by Luke 1:34-35: Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” Remember that that being who brought about the Immaculate Conception was a divine personage. We need not question his method to accomplish his purposes.”

Do you see the problem? The “little” said is about a “divine personage” who came from heaven and did something to impregnate the Virgin Mary. What did the Heavenly Father do??? Mormons can only speculate that there was a mysterious insemination. That sexual transmission of semen is Mormonism.

On the other hand there is the ex-nihilo teaching of the Immaculate Conception. Mormons cannot say that the male DNA or chromosomes came from nothing. However, Christians can say this and really believe the words of Isaiah 7:14 which says “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”

Come to the reall Jesus of the Bible. The real Jesus was conceived in a miracle by ex-nihilo through the Holy Spirit.

I hope and pray you, your wife and your daughter learn this.

In Jesus’ name,

Matt